In a public space, especially not a public space with 20 million TV viewers, there are ZERO good bird flips. Period.
Most of the players haven’t really given descriptions of what they’re doing and why. Also keep in mind there’s a big difference between what you say in a press conference and in court. You’re not under oath in a press conference and it’s not legally binding in any way. So yes they certainly COULD say in court they were praying for justice.
There’s no difference between them saying it’s not disrespectful and not caring if it is or not. The important part, if you’re going to start talking about reasonable men in a court of law, is that the vast majority of fans are not bothered enough by it to change their behavior, they will be the legally defined “reasonable men” and the behavior will be declared not offensive.
Doesn’t matter what they thought after he explained it. The fact that nobody cared means that it was NOT viewed as misconduct from the start.
The ratings are down less than 20%. Meanwhile the revenue looks like it’s going to be up nearly 20%. Ad revenue is actually up. The Verizon contract got renewed at double the price. And if you’re going to go to the “reasonable man” then you’re MAKING truth subject to popular vote. That’s is the point of that structure, the behavior of most folks in most circumstances. Player statements constitute absolutely NOTHING because they were not made in any circumstance under which they are legally compelled to speak the truth.
“In a public space”
If we are to accept that argument, then we must accept that there is no good kneeling on a pro football sideline during the National Anthem, either.
“Most of the players haven’t really given descriptions of what they’re doing and why.”
Oh, I’ll bet they have, and I’ll bet it was recorded, too.
“You’re not under oath in a press conference and it’s not legally binding in any way. So yes they certainly COULD say in court they were praying for justice.”
You do not have to be under oath to betray guilty knowledge. Further, contradicting yourself under oath is a good way to get nailed for perjury.
“There’s no difference between them saying it’s not disrespectful and not caring if it is or not.”
There is when you’re basing the question of misconduct on numbers of boycotters.
“The important part, if you’re going to start talking about reasonable men in a court of law, is that the vast majority of fans are not bothered enough by it to change their behavior”
The question is not whether someone is “bothered” by it.
It is to be expected that anti-American scumbags will not be “bothered” by it, but their complacency is hardly a vote *for* the acceptability of the behavior. Others are deceived by the media. Some are just plain stupid. Many are black racists.
“they will be the legally defined “reasonable men” and the behavior will be declared not offensive.”
You don’t understand the reasonable man standard. That standard will (should) be applied by those who are in possession of the facts in a given case, either the judge or the jury.
“Doesn’t matter what they thought after he explained it. The fact that nobody cared means that it was NOT viewed as misconduct from the start.”
1. Glad to know you have interviewed every American and know their opinions. I know a lot of people who cared, and others must also.
2. When is “the start” for you? The first note of the National Anthem on the first occasion that Kaperwhatever failed to stand? Imposing ridiculous conditions is not a good thing.
“The ratings are down less than 20%.”
Can’t find the article I was reading. Should have saved it. Still, good job sidetracking us onto ratings when that is irrelevant to the issue.
“Ad revenue is actually up. The Verizon contract got renewed at double the price.”
Again, irrelevant to the issue.
“And if you’re going to go to the “reasonable man” then you’re MAKING truth subject to popular vote.”
You do *not* understand the reasonable man standard or its application. Please go read up on it.
“That’s is the point of that structure, the behavior of most folks in most circumstances.”
No, the thinking of a reasonable man in the specific circumstances of a case.
“Player statements constitute absolutely NOTHING because they were not made in any circumstance under which they are legally compelled to speak the truth.”
El wrongadarillo, Hoss.